Laserfiche WebLink
, � � <br /> Date Application Received: NA <br /> Date Application Considered as Complete: NA ' <br /> 60-Day Review Period Expires: NA <br /> To: Chair Schoenzeit and Planning Cornmission <br /> Jessica Loftus, City Administrator <br /> Melanie Curtis � <br /> From: Mike Gaffron, Asst City Administrator - <br /> Date: September 12, 2012 <br /> Subject: #12-3542 Amend Zoning Code Section 78-72 -Lots of Record <br /> -Additional Revisions <br /> Perfinent Regulations: <br /> 1) Minnesota Statutes 462.357 Subd. le.Nonconformities <br /> 2) Minnesota Rules 6120.3300 Subp. 2a Shoreland Lot Area and Width Standards <br /> 3) Orono Zoning Code Section 78-72 Lots of Record(Ord.No. 92, Third Series) <br /> .,�� <br /> Attachments: � <br /> A- Draft Amendment Text <br /> B- Ordinance No. 92,Third Series,adopted March 26, 2012 � <br /> C- MPG Memo 8/2/12-Interpretation of State&City Regs re: Shoreland Nonconforming Lots of <br /> Record <br /> Definition: Lot, lot of record, means any lot for which a deed or registered land survey has <br /> been recorded in the office of the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for <br /> Hennepin County prior to January 1, 1975, and after approval by the council if <br /> required. <br /> Background <br /> In March 2012 the City Council adopted Ordinance 92, Third Series which in part amended <br /> Zoning Code Section 78-72 to bring it into compliance with Minnesota Statutes. <br /> The Statutes require that local governments allow non-conforming single lots of record within <br /> the Shoreland to be developed regardless of lot area if they 1)meet local setback requirements; <br /> 2)have a sewer connection or conforming septic system; and 3)have no more than 25% <br /> hardcover. <br /> The Statutes also address lots that are part of a group of two or more contiguous lots of record . <br /> under common ownership -which must be considered as individually buildable if each 1) <br /> meets 66%of the DNR standards for lot area and lot width; 2)has a sewer connection or <br /> conforming septic system; and 3)has no more than 25%hardcover. <br /> ,�;�.� . <br /> The significant difference between the two categories is subtle - single lots of record are not <br /> granted an automatic lot width variance,just an area variance. In either case, the DNR standards <br /> are much less restrictive than Orono's historic lot area and width requirements for the "LR" <br /> zoning districts. Having spent the past 6 months implementing the new standards, staff questions • <br /> whether Orono's regulation for the 1/2-acre and 1-acre "LR"zoning districts granting automatic <br /> area and width variances based on meeting 80%of the required standards, is still relevant. <br /> Further, it generally seems unnecessary to put property owners through a variance process just <br /> for lot�area or width, if all other zoning standards can be met. <br /> � <br />